USN T-6B crash, Alabama

MikeD

MikeD

Administrator
Staff member
A student naval aviator and instructor pilot from NAS Whiting-based VT-2 were killed when their T-6B Texan trainer crashed into a house near Foley, Alabama during a routine training mission. Neither crew member bailed out of the aircraft. Killed in the crash were:

SNA: Ensign Morgan Garrett, US Coast Guard, 24
IP: Lt Rhiannon Ross, USN, 30

No injuries on the ground were reported and the house in the neighborhood was unoccupied at the time.

www.al.com

Navy asking for videos, photos of plane crash

An U.S. Navy investigation team is asking the public for any videos and photos of Friday's plane crash near Magnolia Springs Elementary School. Two people aboard the plane were killed during the crash.
www.al.com www.al.com
 
Both female aviators (only noteworthy because it's probably relatively rare for such an accident). The USCG student was a friend of a friend stationed at Elizabeth City. So sad.
 
FlyingAccountant said:
Is instructing sort of a garbage gig for a naval aviator or is it one of those right of passage things that everyone has to do?
Click to expand...

@///AMG can speak for the USN side in much more detail, but training command duty is seen differently between the USAF and the USN. In the USAF, one is expected at some point to rotate through training command as an IP or IN, usually after a second operational tour. Unless one is a weapons and tactics officer, who take a different track with flying and staff work. In the USN, VT duty is seen as a negative in that you are leaving your primary airframe “community” and thus not contributing to that mission
 
Read elsewhere that the prop or a prop blade came off during aerobatic maneuvers at 8,000, pilots apparently tried to glide to a nearby runway rather than eject....
 
MikeD said:
@///AMG can speak for the USN side in much more detail, but training command duty is seen differently between the USAF and the USN. In the USAF, one is expected at some point to rotate through training command as an IP or IN, usually after a second operational tour. Unless one is a weapons and tactics officer, who take a different track with flying and staff work. In the USN, VT duty is seen as a negative in that you are leaving your primary airframe “community” and thus not contributing to that mission
Click to expand...
@bunk22 was a Navy IP in the T-45. He can chime in about being an IP.
 
FlyingAccountant said:
Is instructing sort of a garbage gig for a naval aviator or is it one of those right of passage things that everyone has to do?
Click to expand...

Definitely not a "garbage" gig. Career wise, your first shore tour is expected to be what we refer to as "production". That means VT, FRS, VX/TPS, or Weapon School Instructing. There are a few non-production flying jobs, but the vast majority are these. My JO shore tour was in the weapon school IP category, next operational tour was as training officer/weapons officer for a Super Hornet squadron (sole job being instructing), and I'm now a reservist FRS IP. I've very much enjoyed it, and have been fortunate to stay in the cockpit my entire career. Typically the key to doing that is instructing at various points of your career.

As Mike was saying, primary VT's (i.e. the T-6) are pretty rare for fighter background folks, and would probably be considered to be a negative career choice. But for other communities, I'd say it is much more desirable and competitive. Plenty of helo folks out there who have chosen that route to get a bunch of FW time under their belts. Others choose it to get back to more pure fun flying and teaching our highly motivated students. Or QOL considerations, etc etc etc. As far as I know, primary VT is still "on track" for helo/maritime/multiengine folks.
 
Last edited:
MikeD said:
VT duty is seen as a negative in that you are leaving your primary airframe “community” and thus not contributing to that mission
Click to expand...

If your singular career goal is to command a squadron, a VT assignment as a LT probably puts you behind the curve with fair opportunities to recover.

There are some prestigious shore assignments far from your community, sometimes pretty far from boats and planes.

Sometimes, you can be dealt a tough hand. I wouldn't want to jump out of a helicopter and into a fixed wing IP gig.

A LCDR wrapping up his 20 in a VT squadron did a bunch of things right to get there.

If you use a Talladega Nights philosophy, a bunch of amazing LCDR's retire at 20, finishing last. I don't embrace that philosophy and I'm a little slow to use the "negative" word.
 
Last edited:
gliderboy said:
Read elsewhere that the prop or a prop blade came off during aerobatic maneuvers at 8,000, pilots apparently tried to glide to a nearby runway rather than eject....
Click to expand...

A blade departing will cause a significant vibration, usually followed by the engine giving chase and departing airframe.

Is anyone here a T-6II pilot and can elaborate on if a checklist exists for high vibration?
 
CFI A&P said:
A blade departing will cause a significant vibration, usually followed by the engine giving chase and departing airframe.

Is anyone here a T-6II pilot and can elaborate on if a checklist exists for high vibration?
Click to expand...

I checked the NATOPS Emergency Procedures for the T-6 and they keep it simple, nothing addresses high vibration, just Engine Out (restart, land, or eject), Controllability (fly or eject), and Forced Landings on Unprepared Surfaces (not recommended).
 
Pilot Fighter said:
A LCDR wrapping up his 20 in a VT squadron did a bunch of things right to get there.

If you use a Talladega Nights philosophy, a bunch of amazing LCDR's retire at 20, finishing last. I don't embrace that philosophy and I'm a little slow to use the "negative" word.
Click to expand...

Well outside the original context, but I agree. The reserves is a weird Narnia, but I know a few folks who have elected to not promote beyond O-4 and remained in the cockpit. You can do that as an O-5 on an "overgrade" waiver (which has been largely granted in the last few years), but it isn't a guarantee. Those I speak of didn't want to take the chance. If you leave active duty as an O-4 and give even 1 f*** about making O-5, you probably will, so FOS wasn't their motivation. But if you pull SAU CO you will absolutely get forced out of the jet by around year 16-17. Active duty is a bit different, but you can at least retire at 20 as a FOSx2 O-4 pretty much guaranteed.....though pretty much guaranteed to not be flying for the last 5 years, which probably addresses your point that those AD flying 20 year O-4's are mystical creatures.
 
///AMG said:
Well outside the original context, but I agree. The reserves is a weird Narnia, but I know a few folks who have elected to not promote beyond O-4 and remained in the cockpit. You can do that as an O-5 on an "overgrade" waiver (which has been largely granted in the last few years), but it isn't a guarantee. Those I speak of didn't want to take the chance. If you leave active duty as an O-4 and give even 1 f*** about making O-5, you probably will, so FOS wasn't their motivation. But if you pull SAU CO you will absolutely get forced out of the jet by around year 16-17. Active duty is a bit different, but you can at least retire at 20 as a FOSx2 O-4 pretty much guaranteed.....though pretty much guaranteed to not be flying for the last 5 years, which probably addresses your point that those AD flying 20 year O-4's are mystical creatures.
Click to expand...

More than anything, I was addressing the VT stigma. You can be a SH pilot and officer and lose the lottery if you have some strong LT peers.
 
OK, this isn't speculation. This is me venting as a Naval Aviator, and I need somewhere to do it so it might as well be here. Why, oh why, did they not EJECT?! The airplane has million dollar seats in it specifically to save the pilots asses in this exact situation. I think that between evolving from the T34C where you had to open the canopy and physically climb out with a parachute hanging on your ass, and also the command being overall very low on instructors who come from a platform with ejection seats the Primary squadrons have evolved to NOT PULL THE HANDLE. Huge, HUGE organizational failure. They never evolved away from the constant litany of engine failure emergency procedures that they did in the T34, and do you think a former jet pilot would have rode that thing into a damn house? NOPE. If I have controllability, I'm pointing it somewhere safe and slowing it down.

We could still have two young, high potential aviators with us drinking and telling their story. Instead, they're in a smoking hole that they didn't have to be in.
 
^ I dont disagree of course, but I do wonder if there was something else going on too? Because, like you said, this doesn't add up. I never experienced the T-6 so I can't comment on the training/NATOPS culture there, but if that is true, it needs to be addressed immediately.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top